Turning "low tier" AR into "good enough"

[BroodXI]

cheapest parts that meet TDP spec.

which is not the holy grail.

 

[Vigilant]

which is not the holy grail.

As far as a proper mil-spec rifle/carbine is concerned, the TDP is the grail, which is why Colt fought so hard NOT to release it to the .gov for the M4 platform. And why until 2050ish, Colt will be getting royalties for it, regardless of who builds the M4 for the .gov.

With that, I am bowing out of an argument about making something "good enough"!

 

[avboiler11]

If I were getting a dedicated 'fighting rifle', I would want it to meet TDP...if only because it provides a uniform standard, a baseline if you will, for a battle-proven infantry weapon. When the rifle is meant solely for defense of life, compromises are not acceptable IMO.

If I were getting a rifle for any other purpose than a dedicated 'fighting rifle', I'd be less concerned about a 6061 receiver extension, a 4140 (or stainless 410/416) barrel vs. 4150, melonite vs. chrome lining, 5.56 vs. Wylde chamber, or any number of other things that don't meet TDP but don't necessarily make a rifle unreliable.

Proper staking, quality bolt, properly mounted FSB, etc. are mandatory regardless.

Some folks wouldn't accept anything that doesn't meet TDP, because "Why risk it?", and that is certainly their prerogative.

I don't think anybody would argue that an Oracle is as good as a 6920, BCM Jack or a DDM4V1...but an Oracle *might* be "good enough" depending on one's (channeling Nutnfancy) "philosophy of use".

I have found this thread highly informative and think it'll help others looking to improve the reliability of their weapons, and appreciate Vigilant's input as an experienced armorer...even if I've disagreed with him a couple time along the way.

 

[rhino]

I don't even know what "TDP" is. I'll find out, but I don't know right now.

Edited to add:

"Technical Data Package." More jargon and acronyms. Great.

 

[Ruffnek]

I'm glad that this thread has turned itself back on course.Any specific parts that anyone recommends?If you were replacing a barrel on the example DPMS rifle,what would you go with?What BCG?

 

[billt]

Also remember that few, if any companies manufacture all of their own parts. I'm told Daniel Defense does, however I've never seen ANY proof to back that up. Most are vendor supplied. I've seen both Colt and Stag Arms rifles with bolts and bolt carriers that came from here.

Continental Machine Tool Company, Inc.

They supply both "low end" and "high end" manufacturers with many of the same parts. The fact of the matter is unless you know exactly who made the parts in your rifle, (which by the way manufacturers won't tell you), and what they're made from and heat treated to, you are speculating about "quality". All the rest is a bunch of smoke filled, coffee house crap that has been debated to death, with no proof either way.

 

[88E30M50]

Here's an interesting grid I found linked through M4Carbine.net. M4 Chart. This is a spreadsheet that details what goes into a quality AR. Here's another link that lists common AR questions: AR Technical Discussion FAQ/Knowledge Base Threads.

I'm still an AR noobie, but from what I understand based on this thread, info from M4Carbine.net and from Mike down at USDS, the biggest expense in getting a gun upgraded from plinker to class ready tool is the BCG. Actually, it comes down to mainly the bolt, but there may be benefits to swapping the entire BCG. There is anecdotal evidence that suggests the DPMS carrier is made of a lesser grade of steel and that even properly staked gas keys can eventually loosen. Swapping the entire BCG with a quality one not only ensures proper staking of the gas key, but also reduces the chance of the gas key loosening over time through metal fatigue.

From what I understand, once you take care of the BCG, you just need to inspect for proper castle nut staking and make sure the gas tube is properly installed. After that, stuff you add will be based on personal preference. Mike pointed out that a thin barrelled DPMS could heat up quickly in a training situation and that it's worth thinking about the quality of the hand guard heat shield. Also, if you run a quad rail without covers, it will do a number on your hand by the end of a long day shooting.

My take on the barrel is that the stock DPMS non-chrome lined barrel is good enough for a class. It seems that chrome lining is needed if you spend a long time in the field but for a multi-day training class, the non-chrome barrel is probably not going to cause an issue. Trigger packages seem no different in philosophy for ARs as for any other firearm. Stock works but aftermarket can work better. A DPMS is no different than any other AR in the fact that it needs good mags and a good quality sling.

That is what I understand should be done to a DPMS to take it above being a plinker and into a gun that will take you through a multi-day class with a high rate of fire. I am, by no means, an expert and despite having owned ARs for years, am still a noobie in terms of improvements to the platform. If you are wanting to take a DPMS to war, I imagine there would be a whole lot more money that would need to be put into it but for home defense and training classes, I think this might do.

If anyone disagrees, please let me know where I'm off base with this. Am I missing anything?

 

[cwillour]

your answer is, I never said parts guns are of inferior quality, I said certain manufacturers are of low quality. DD, LMT, Larue, all sell "parts" to make guns. If assembled PROPERLY, by someone who knows what they are doing, you will have a decent rifle, if you start with cheap junk, you end up with polished cheap junk! It's worthless to argue, so, I guess yes, you can turn inferior quality into good enough, if good enough is all you strive for, you got it!

Sorry if I took your quote:

Keep on keepin on with your home built upper and lower. I for one will buy quality from day one ....

the wrong way.

As far as a proper mil-spec rifle/carbine is concerned, the TDP is the grail, which is why Colt fought so hard NOT to release it to the .gov for the M4 platform. And why until 2050ish, Colt will be getting royalties for it, regardless of who builds the M4 for the .gov.

Not to knock the TDP, but the fact remains it is only the "grail" for a baseline configuration. LaRue (which you mentioned earlier) seems to be a great example of a high-quality rifle that doesn't appear to fit the spec, but in a good way. Many of their high-quality features (stainless barrels, adjustable gas blocks, hard-chromed bolt & carrier, 10moa built into upper, and 2-stage SSA triggers) are are integral to the quality and usability of the rifle, but I doubt you would find any of these in the TDP.

FWIW, I suspect that by the time the OP finishes purchasing all the parts, he may well have spent more on the rifle than simply doing what he wants with the DPMS & purchasing a new Colt 6920 or BCM standard (possibly even a base model LMT?) once he has the funds. That being said, if done correctly I don't think he needs to end up with a "lessor" rifle and it is his money.

Along that thought process, I think starting with a good-quality BCG (BCM) and then picking up a complete BCM upper are two solid steps in a positive direction. With that $600+ investment ($170 for the BCG + $440 for their basic upper) all that is left to replace the DPMS is a complete lower and sights/optics. While not everyone may agree, it is my understanding that the Damage Industries LPKs, 7075 receiver extensions, enhanced buffer springs, and H-buffers are of good quality and are somewhat less expensive than other comparable lines.

 

[Co Th G]

how about you just sell it and buy a 6920/BCM/DD/LMT? if you want to skimp go PSA. why drop $400 into a $600 rifle that when your finshed is still a $600 rifle?

+1. Just like guys who spend big bucks sending their MIMber 1911 to a custom gunsmith for mods. In the end it's still a MIMber.

 

[88E30M50]

+1. Just like guys who spend big bucks sending their MIMber 1911 to a custom gunsmith for mods. In the end it's still a MIMber.

Dude, you need to get over your MIM part issues. If you rule out MIM parts, you rule out a lot of guns. Most guns actually. Colts are loaded with MIM parts. If you are going to call out Kimber for using MIM parts and maybe a plastic MSH too, you need to acknowledge the fact that Colts are no better in that regard. More expensive, but not better. I'm guessing most production guns contain some MIM parts somewhere. I'm guessing my Sigs are full of MIM parts as well.

 

[billt]

Dude, you need to get over your MIM part issues. If you rule out MIM parts, you rule out a lot of guns. Most guns actually. Colts are loaded with MIM parts. If you are going to call out Kimber for using MIM parts and maybe a plastic MSH too, you need to acknowledge the fact that Colts are no better in that regard. More expensive, but not better. I'm guessing most production guns contain some MIM parts somewhere. I'm guessing my Sigs are full of MIM parts as well.

+100!

I get really tired of hearing about how horrible MIM parts are. I've worked in the Aerospace machining industry for over 40 years. Every time you get on a plane today, you're flying with MIM parts. A lot of them. And the fact is you are flying safer than you've ever flown. With engines that have longer TBO's than ever before.

Not buying a given firearm because it contains MIM parts, is just more Internet nonsense that get's regurgitated over and over with zero fact or reason to back it up. Colt 1911's not only have MIM parts, but my new steel Commander Model came with a plastic mainspring housing......... The same way my Kimber did. Badmouthing Kimber, while praising Colt in the same breath is ridiculous, and proves lack of knowledge, nothing more.